November 5, 2012

It's 7 a.m. here in Wisconsin, which might just make the difference in the Electoral College, with our measly but magnificent 10 votes. I've seen various permutations of the Electoral College map — here, create your own map — and it's easy to see how Wisconsin could put Romney over the top even if he loses Ohio and Pennsylvania and Iowa.

Air Force One touched down in Madison at 2:30 a.m., and a small group of people were lined up on State Street at 6, but the line has grown in the last hour. Madison gave Obama his largest crowd of the campaign when he was here a month ago, but he was here a month ago, and that was in the afternoon in the middle of campus. Now, it's early Monday morning, a time when young people are difficult to rouse from their warm beds, and, speaking of warmth, it's 30° in Madison right now. It was a long wait in the rain for the campus speech last month.

And people must remember that you don't just get to see Obama and that other guy you might care about. (Do the young folk care about seeing Bruce Springsteen?) You have to put up with the local politicos — the mayor and so forth. Meanwhile, it's all on TV.... and has been for months. (Years?) The reason to go is not so much to see, but to be seen. Lend your body to the photograph of Obama with the Wisconsin Capitol looming in the background. As it looms, you may wonder, where was Obama when you were marching and chanting and drumming last year protesting Scott Walker? Where was Obama last spring when you dragged Scott Walker into a recall election? He expressed tepid support from afar, but declined to set foot in Wisconsin, even when he was right at the border in Minneapolis/Chicago.

Ironically, that recall election forced Republicans to develop their ground game in Wisconsin, and that's exactly what may push Mitt Romney over the top tomorrow. Here's RNC chairman Reince Priebus, yesterday on "State of the Union":

[The Democrats] haven’t been able to win in Wisconsin for a long time. They claim that the Obama machine was out during the Walker recall. We basically crushed them in Wisconsin. I have seen firsthand the difference between Obama’s rhetoric on their ground game and the reality, and the reality is they’re not as good as they think they are....

When you see that Wisconsin State Capitol in the background in today's Obama photo-ops, remember all that it symbolizes: an immense GOP victory in 2010, a huge and rude months-long uprising of the left end of the Democratic Party's target constituency (shunned by Obama himself) in 2011, and, in 2012, a decisive victory in the recall election for GOP Governor Scott Walker. What about all those Democratic voters splayed out around the GOP-dominated Capitol building? Hello? This is Madison, Wisconsin. The state Capitol building is always surrounded by Democrats. Every day, every month, every year. Madison does not control election outcomes in Wisconsin. In fact, there are an awful lot of people in Wisconsin whose idea of Madison is: This is not what Wisconsin looks like. And the people of Madison return the sentiment. We've been amusing ourselves with the saying "Madison is X square miles surrounded by reality" for a long, long time.

Obama will win by a landslide in Madison, but Madison — as we all know and have been telling ourselves for decades — is not reality.

105 comments:

Interesting video link at Drudge from a heckler last night in Cincinnati. That heckler took Obama and the pro Obama crowd completely off their game. They aren't used to having a protestor disrupt one of THEIR events.

This is a curious thing about hardcore lefties I started noticing a few years ago. That they often like to live in enclaves surrounded by people who think just like they do. One hears about places like Portland, Seattle, Berkley, Austin, I lived in Ithaca (NY) for 9 years. I have a friend in Decatur who commented how glad he was to live in a place where everyone was a "progressive".

Is it my imagination or do "conservatives" seem much more willing to live in places with more diversity of opinion?

The big news is that a lot of voters decided they couldn't vote for Obama a long time ago. They also decided that they were going to keep that under their hat--they didn't want the confrontation--or even want to talk about it. They were going to sit this one out, for the most part. After the first debate, some--not all--decided to vote for Romney because they saw someone different than the picture that had been painter by the media.Looking at all the numbers, including early voting, I think that most States are in play--even Illinois. Look at the absentee count in Chicago--the lowest in several election cycles and a good source of manufactured votes. From all the Benghazi talk I'm hearing in Chicago, it's going to play a bigger role than the Lefties here are hoping. It might go down as the issue that sealed Romney's victory. Everyone can see that Obama and the Media kicked the can down the road until after the election.

How can you stand to live in such a looney ugly place? Madison sounds just awful. Why don't you live in Waukesha County? As a college professor you don't need to be on campus everyday and you don't need to be there at all in the summer. Why you willingly surround yourself with mean ugly people in a trashy over-taxed poorly runned city is a real mystery.

I can’t make it to tne rally but if I could I’d gather 4 other friends to hold up 4 large placards in view of the students going into and out of the rally.

A graphic showing unemployment the last four years, one showing labor participation rate the last four years, one showing the national debt the last four years and the CBO projection the next four – possibly with a line noting “you students will have to pay for this”, and finally a graphic showing unemployment and under-employment of recent college grads (I believe it is over 50%). And then perhaps a sign saying “Enjoy the Show, and if Obama wins, I hope you enjoy living in your parent’s basement”

And, just for good measure, and given its Guy Fawkes day, we’d all wear Occupy Wall Street/Guy Fawkes masks just to create even more cognitive dissonance for the students.

That they often like to live in enclaves surrounded by people who think just like they do.

Places like Madison used to be little bastions of free thinking, liberty, etc. Somewhere along the way they morphed into something which thought itself strong enough to become the dominant force(s) in intellectual, civic, & commercial American life. No longer reliant upon volition, they organized into forces. Tomorrow they will be tested on this point and the result will be bolster or retreat.

I drove up to Green Bay from Chicago on Saturday for the Packers game. Over the entire trip, I saw maybe 3 Obama signs, and countless Romney/Ryan and Tommy for Senate signs. At the tailgate, there were plenty of tables with Romney/Ryan signs, none with Obama signs (just one of the houses on Lombardi Ave. Based on that, Madison's going to need a ton of votes to stay Democrat.

This morning I'm thinking about the leftist activists who threatened to withhold support for Obama because he shunned them in their hour of need. Mostly I'm wondering "why are you doing exactly what you said you wouldn't"?. Support is always a one way street with Democratic politicians. But then their policies are one way too [money goes to them and nothing comes back] so that seems appropriate. The question is why people fight for politicians who promise goodies but return nothing.

Walker won the recall handily because enough people were pissed off over the notion of the recall. It was a bad idea by the Democrats, but I don't think it translates into much for the presidential election. The notion that it greatly improved Republican "ground game" is just more wishful thinking.

I think it is telling that BHO is spending his last campaign day (in part) in Madison. While the inevitable adoration will be soothing, it seems desperate.

The President will not move the needle here in MSN. If he wanted to generate turn out, he should have campaigned in LaCrosse or the Chippewa Valley.

@rightisright, Madison politics are annoying and at times despicable. It is, nevertheless, a fabulous place to live. Don't get me wrong, I really like Waukesha, but political compatibility is not the driving criteria where I would want to live.

My office window looks down Carroll Street to State Street and there has been a steady stream of people--mainly baby boomers and not very many college students, but it is early--I think they will get the 80,000 people they are looking for. I don't think that Bruce Springsteen is a big draw for college students but he will be a huge draw for the baby boomers. They are giving everyone Obama-Biden stickers to wear and it looks like most people are wearing them. Some people with pro-life signs are also in the mix of people.

I'm so glad I live in a red state. I lived in Louisville, Ky for thirty some years and its kind of liberal. People in rural Ky think Louisville is a dangerous place, I guess because they're always reading about the killings in the poor black sections of the city.

If Wisconsin goes Romney, won't people look back at the recall, Supreme Court bruhaha, etc., and wonder if those events took too much energy (and money) out of the unions get-out-the-vote effort? Obama's visit today seems to be aimed at the young people (in Madison and across the country) to urge them to renew their 2008 enthusiasm for Obama. But that's young people, not unions.

This is another reason that makes Wisconsin an especially interesting race this year.

I see that Clinton and Richard Trumka are headed into Pittsburgh today for a rally.

In PA?

How can that be?

The left has been telling us that PA is not in play, haven't they?

But, but the Pittsburg market covers eastern Ohio and it will help bolster dem hopes there as Richard Trumka will stand up and tell coal industry workers that it is very important for coal workers to support the man who wants to shut down their industry.

But if PA is not in play, why wouldn't you just go rally in Ohio if that is where the real battle lay?

I actually had an election worker come to the house yesterday, asking whether I've voted, and if my wife voted. I told him I had and my wife hadn't, and that I thought our votes cancelled each other out.

I'd like to hear your analysis of how WI can be so close in the pools when the Repubs have had these crushing victories in the last couple of years.

Remember that the Walker recall election was held during the summer, when the college kids were sitting back home on their couches and not being driven flock-like to the polls by their benevolent Democrat Party shepherds.

I'm sticking by my prediction of a Romney win here, but I don't envision it being by much....

If I may say, with the respect to the election tomorrow. My friend PHX and shared a conversation that is, i think, worth repeating:

The election is close and both PHX and I will respect the will of the electorate. (I think I encapsulated PHXs response) PHX leans left, and I lean right. That said, it is important that the nation goes on.

Here in CA I know the feeling. It's like being on a runaway bus full of kids who force you to the back and won't let you take the wheel. Crazy-eyed children of the corn chanting accusation as the bus careens toward the cliff.

Actually, Madison being surrounded by the rest of Wisconsin, is in nowhere near as bad a situation. All you Madisonians should thank a non-Madisonian Wisconsinite today. Just say: "Thanks for taking the wheel."

We do, however, have the right not to be happy about it. On that score, it might be incumbent to remind the Lefties that a lot of people on the Right - granted, not all - were willing to give Barry the benefit of the doubt.

PHX--my pleasure sir--it is possible to disagree on policy choices, and even as to candidates. But we should, as you do, keep our eye on the ball which, IMO, is the Republic. At the end of the day, we need to respect the electoral choices of all Americans.

"We do, however, have the right not to be happy about it. On that score, it might be incumbent to remind the Lefties that a lot of people on the Right - granted, not all - were willing to give Barry the benefit of the doubt."

People _said_ they would give Obama the benefit of the doubt. What exactly did that mean? He hadn't been accused of a crime and this wasn't the presumption of innocence. It's supposed to be a nice-sounding phrase that's based in fact in delusional or mendacious thinking. I believe it meant people would support him until such time as he actually did something they disagreed with. People who said this either imagined he would not govern as a Democrat (albeit a centrist one) -- that was delusional -- or they said it knowing he would and thus with the full expectation their "support" would be withdrawn almost immediately -- that was mendacious.

Yes, thank me a Waukesha resident, for taking the wheel. And I have only one cat and naked windows, the view being beautiful. Ann and Meade would love my 1930's era lake house. Bonus, a gorgeous spaniel springer lives next door, he loves to play throw rocks in lake, he fetches. Its not the plumber.

@Unknown. The President was given the benefit of the doubt because he was spectacularly unqualified for the job.

In 2007 (or there about) Jesse Jackson said something like "Barack Obama has never run anything but his mouth"

His ascent to the Presidency was the culmination of very little in the way of actual accomplishment or experience. Yes, he was a US Senator for 4 years when elected. But he was a US Senator for about 4 days when he started to run for President

Here is what I wrote about Obama right before he got elected: I think it has held-up pretty well.

To those on the left-hand side of the Democratic party, a vote for Senator Obama is totally rational. He is as liberal a candidate as his party has run in recent history. This article is not for you, if you fit into the above category. This is for a class of Obama supporter which can be represented by Christopher Buckley:

But having a first-class temperament and a first-class intellect, President Obama will (I pray, secularly) surely understand that traditional left-politics aren’t going to get us out of this pit we’ve dug for ourselves. If he raises taxes and throws up tariff walls and opens the coffers of the DNC to bribe-money from the special interest groups against whom he has (somewhat disingenuously) railed during the campaign trail, then he will almost certainly reap a whirlwind that will make Katrina look like a balmy summer zephyr.

I think these people are mistaken when they think Obama will be pragmatic: Here are two reasons why.

1. In the April 16th Democratic debate, Charles Gibson pointed-out that when cap gains tax rates are lowered, the government takes in more revenue. Obama responded (to the effect) that it was a matter of "fairness". This is not the mind of a pragmatic person.

2. History: Back when Bill Clinton was first elected President, he too had a Democratic Congress. He tried to finesse a progressive agenda. It didn't work. The things he got done were not all that radical, but they were radical enough to loose him both houses of Congress. The only significant legislative accomplishments from then on were moderate/conservative in nature (Nafta and Welfare Reform). He never got another chance to push-forward anything remotely progressive.

Obama is smart enough to realize that if he does what Clinton did, he will have no legacy. If he rams-through big stuff in the first two years it won't matter if Congress goes Republican. The Republicans will not get veto-proof majorities and will thus not be able to reverse any of what he does in the first two years.

The pragmatic camp will regret their hope that Obama doesn't mean to do what he has promised to do.

ADDED: Yes, I know that Obama's 180 on taking public financing argue that he is indeed pragmatic. Yes, if pragmatic=dishonest. This only benefited him personally, as I have argued above; he will not gain anything from being pragmatic once in office.

I hope we know early on that Romney is going to win so I can enjoy the night as I continue to watch the results. A close election will not be good for our country. The best result would be a big Romney victory so that it will be accepted and we can get on with doing what needs to be done.

I completely accepted Bush's getting the decision from the SCOTUS in 2000 and I'd like everyone to respect the decision in 2012. No way that's gonna happen though.

Why not?Among intelligent conservatives it's taken for granted that progressives are going to cheat like mad. It's just something progressives and democrats do. Rioting when outcomes are not to their liking is something else progressives and democrats do.When Romney wins despite all the progressive vote fraud you will whine and complain and riot or threaten to riot. It's just something you do.

I hope we know early on that Romney is going to win so I can enjoy the night as I continue to watch the results. A close election will not be good for our country. The best result would be a big Romney victory so that it will be accepted and we can get on with doing what needs to be done.

If they call PA (or Jersey, or even CT or NY - not likely, but people are mad) early, it's over.

In a truly fair universe the election would come down to Staten Island, which would mean that Obama would be sent packing.

But Staten Island committed the blasphemy of voting for a Republican for Congress, the Democrat candidate being too much of a hack even for a borough of New York City, so they've been left to dig out from Sandy on their own.

It is somewhat amusing to read this some 10 days after the election, and then reading all the "what happened" and "election fraud" allegations since then, and that the armed forces vote not included because those votes were received a day late - after being sent 8 months ago. And that "Benghazi" thing, and the price of gas going back up. The national debt approaching 17 trillion and Harry Reid stating that the debt limit will be raised another $2 (some) trillion saying "thats a fact, it's the way things are done". And the administration will start discussions on how to deal with the economy - talking to labor leaders on the first day. And new regulations mount every day.

The time will come that the democrats will change their name to the labor party - because that's what they are.